There’s a thing where lots of people will say that they are EA Adjacent rather than EA (funny post related to this). In particular, it seems to me that the closer to the core people are, the less inclined they are to identify themselves with EA. What’s going on here? I don’t know, but it’s an interesting trailhead to me.
Plausibly there are some aspects of EA, the culture, norms, worldview, individuals, organisations etc. that people disagree with or don’t endorse, and so prefer to not identify as EAs.
I’m unsure how much to treat this as reflective of a substantive issue vs. a quirk, or reflective of things being actually fine. At least in terms of EA being a ‘beacon for thoughtful, sincere, and selfless’, it seems a little bit worrying to me that some of the core members of the community aren’t willing to describe themselves as EA.
Perhaps a way of getting to the heart of this is asking people something like: Imagine you’re talking to someone who is thoughtful, sincere and selfless. Would you recommend EA to them? Which parts? How strongly? Would you express any reservations?
Looping back to the question of ‘What is it for EA to thrive?’, one answer is: It’s the kind of community that EA’s would strongly recommend to a thoughtful, sincere and selfless friend.
(Maybe this is too strong—people will probably reasonably have disagreements about what aspects of EA are good and aren’t, and if everyone is very positive on EA in this way, this plausibly means that there’s not enough disagreement in the community. )
In particular, it seems to me that the closer to the core people are, the less inclined they are to identify themselves with EA. What’s going on here? I don’t know, but it’s an interesting trailhead to me.
I think this implies that there is a substantive non-quirky effect. That said, I imagine some of this may be explained by new EAs simply being particularly enthusiastic in ways which explain stronger identification with EA and higher satisfaction.[1]
One dynamic which I expect explains this is the narcissism of small differences, as people become closer to EA, differences and disagreements become more salient, and so people may become more inclined to want to distance themselves from EA as a whole.
If being thoughtful, sincere and selfless is a core value, it seems like it would be more of a problem if influential people in the community felt they had to embrace the label even if they didn’t think it was valuable or accurate
I suspect a lot of the ‘EA adjacent’ description comes from question marks about particular characteristics EA stances or image rather than doubting some of their friends could benefit from participating in the community, and that part of that is less a rejection of EA altogether and more an acknowledgement they often find themselves at least as closely aligned with people doing great work outside the community.
(Fwiw I technically fit into the “adjacent” bracket from the other side: never been significantly active in the community, like some of its ideas and values—many of which I believed in before ‘EA’ was a thing—and don’t identify with or disagree with other ideas commonly associated with EA, so it wouldn’t really make much sense to call myself an EA)
What’s going on with ‘EA Adjacents’?
There’s a thing where lots of people will say that they are EA Adjacent rather than EA (funny post related to this). In particular, it seems to me that the closer to the core people are, the less inclined they are to identify themselves with EA. What’s going on here? I don’t know, but it’s an interesting trailhead to me.
Plausibly there are some aspects of EA, the culture, norms, worldview, individuals, organisations etc. that people disagree with or don’t endorse, and so prefer to not identify as EAs.
I’m unsure how much to treat this as reflective of a substantive issue vs. a quirk, or reflective of things being actually fine. At least in terms of EA being a ‘beacon for thoughtful, sincere, and selfless’, it seems a little bit worrying to me that some of the core members of the community aren’t willing to describe themselves as EA.
Perhaps a way of getting to the heart of this is asking people something like: Imagine you’re talking to someone who is thoughtful, sincere and selfless. Would you recommend EA to them? Which parts? How strongly? Would you express any reservations?
Looping back to the question of ‘What is it for EA to thrive?’, one answer is: It’s the kind of community that EA’s would strongly recommend to a thoughtful, sincere and selfless friend.
(Maybe this is too strong—people will probably reasonably have disagreements about what aspects of EA are good and aren’t, and if everyone is very positive on EA in this way, this plausibly means that there’s not enough disagreement in the community. )
I share this impression. Also, we see that satisfaction is lower among people who have been in EA longer compared to newer EAs (though this is not true for self-reported engagement), which seems potentially related. Note that we would expect to see pressure in the opposite direction due to less satisfied people dropping out over time.
I think this implies that there is a substantive non-quirky effect. That said, I imagine some of this may be explained by new EAs simply being particularly enthusiastic in ways which explain stronger identification with EA and higher satisfaction.[1]
One dynamic which I expect explains this is the narcissism of small differences, as people become closer to EA, differences and disagreements become more salient, and so people may become more inclined to want to distance themselves from EA as a whole.
I’m not suggesting any particular causal theory about the relationship between satisfaction and identification.
If being thoughtful, sincere and selfless is a core value, it seems like it would be more of a problem if influential people in the community felt they had to embrace the label even if they didn’t think it was valuable or accurate
I suspect a lot of the ‘EA adjacent’ description comes from question marks about particular characteristics EA stances or image rather than doubting some of their friends could benefit from participating in the community, and that part of that is less a rejection of EA altogether and more an acknowledgement they often find themselves at least as closely aligned with people doing great work outside the community.
(Fwiw I technically fit into the “adjacent” bracket from the other side: never been significantly active in the community, like some of its ideas and values—many of which I believed in before ‘EA’ was a thing—and don’t identify with or disagree with other ideas commonly associated with EA, so it wouldn’t really make much sense to call myself an EA)